Q: Section 2030.300(c) agreement in writing requirement
Does Section 2030.300(c) require that agreement between parties re additional time to provide further responses be formal stipulation filed with Court? Or track record of email exchange is sufficient for agreement in writing?
A: It does not need to be a formal stipulation and it does not need to be filed with the court.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
- California
- (916) 704-3009
- View Profile
- Answered
A:
To address your question about whether Section 2030.300(c) of the California Code of Civil Procedure requires a formal stipulation filed with the court for an agreement between parties regarding additional time to provide further responses, or if an email exchange is sufficient:
Section 2030.300(c) states: "If the propounding party, on receipt of a response to interrogatories, deems that (1) an answer to a particular interrogatory is evasive or incomplete, (2) an exercise of the option to produce documents under Section 2030.230 is unwarranted or the required specification of those documents is inadequate, or (3) an objection to an interrogatory is without merit or too general, that party may move for an order compelling a further response. This motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. Unless notice of this motion is given within 45 days of the service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the propounding party and the responding party have agreed in writing, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response to the interrogatories."
The key phrase here is "have agreed in writing." The statute does not explicitly require a formal stipulation filed with the court. An agreement in writing, such as a clear email exchange between the parties agreeing to a specific later date, would likely be sufficient to satisfy this requirement.
However, it is generally a best practice to memorialize any agreements between parties in a formal stipulation filed with the court. This ensures that there is a clear record of the agreement and helps avoid potential disputes later on. If there is any doubt or disagreement about the terms of an email exchange, having a filed stipulation can provide clarity and certainty.
In summary, while Section 2030.300(c) does not appear to require a formal stipulation, it is often advisable to use one to document agreements between parties regarding deadlines and discovery issues. An email exchange may be sufficient, but a stipulation provides a higher level of protection and clarity.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
